Waitangi Day ‘cringe’

Bill English has not surprisingly provoked some comment when he rsaid “A lot of New Zealanders cringe a bit on Waitangi Day …”, but Waitangi Day ‘cringe’ comes from lack of understanding, Maori Party says

English has attracted controversy while defending his decision to skip Waitangi commemorations due to a lack of speaking rights, saying protests at Waitangi had been “nationally relevant” 15 to 20 years ago but were not anymore.

“Political discussion at Te Tii Marae is now really about Ngapuhi issues and their own concerns in Northland, but it’s a national day, a day for New Zealanders to be proud of their whole country.”

“A lot of New Zealanders cringe a bit on Waitangi Day when they see the way that the ceremonies are being conducted, the ceremonies and welcomes, the type of protest there has been in recent years, and I’m pretty keen that we have a day when they’re proud.”

Maori Party co-leader Marama Fox…

…said English’s comments were “unfortunate” and did not match up with her perspective of the day’s importance.

“A lot of New Zealanders may feel that way, but that comes from a lack of understanding, a lack of education, and a lack of acceptance of the place of Maori in this country, so when that changes, we’ll all have a greater, united Aotearoa.”

Fox said she would have liked English to attend Waitangi commemorations, but his decision would not affect her plans to go.

“We are not the Maori arm of the National Party – we are going to attend as the Maori Party, and I will be taking my place in the powhiri, and I’m pretty sure nobody’s given me an opportunity to have a stage to speak, and I’m not concerned about that.”

Waitangi and Te Tii Marae were “surrounded in Maori protocol”, and it was up to marae leaders to decide whether someone could speak.

There are a number of protocols that I participate in at Parliament that I think are antiquated and should move on – those are my opinions. It is for Maori and the people of Te Tii, the people of Waitangi to decide how the programme should run – it’s their place.”

Fair enough, to an extent, about “Maori protocol” in a Maori forum, but if Waitangi Day is to ever become widely seen and felt to be a national day of significance then the commemorations need to involve and include both partners to the treaty, not just Maori.

Leave a comment

36 Comments

  1. Alan Wilkinson

     /  January 9, 2017

    Pompous posturing from Ngapuhi has got to stop before NZ will be interested in their Waitangi events again.

    Reply
  2. Kitty Catkin

     /  January 9, 2017

    Bill English is quite right that the events would be an insult to the PM rather than him.

    If it’s a national day, one small group should not control who speaks and who doesn’t. Marama Fox’s statement is disingenuous.

    Reply
  3. Waitangi Day is no longer a national celebration of Unity of the nation because of the greed and ignorance of Ngapuhi rangatira whose mana continues to be diminished. Winston Peters, where are you?

    Reply
    • Gezza

       /  January 9, 2017

      Rubbing his hands together gleefully somewhere, knowing the tikanga & kaupapa is pono, & knowing others don’t, & that this situation could be very advantagous if he plays his cards carefully.

      Reply
    • It never was a celebration of unity of the nation Beejay. We never had unity of the nation.

      Do you seriously think that just because Hobson said “He iwi tahi tatou” this MAKES IT SO?

      We never had unity of the nation mostly because of the greed and arrogance of Pakeha …

      Reply
      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  January 10, 2017

        Speak for yourself, white man.

        Reply
        • I use the word “Pakeha” in the sense of ‘ foreigner or alien’ Alan, as per the Maori dictionary …

          The fact that I’m of European or English descent, or as you say “white”, makes no difference to the usage of the word, even in its meaning as ‘of European or English descent’. It is not meant as an insult …

          Anyhow … Are you saying we always did have unity as a nation? And that English and European New Zealanders were never or very seldom greedy and arrogant?

          Reply
          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  January 10, 2017

            I’m saying you are not in a position to know about most others, only about yourself.

            Reply
            • Oh … Crikey Alan! In that case Beejay’s much vaunted “written history” is nothing but a dead letter …?

              You mean to say one cannot extrapolate or generalise beyond one’s self? All history must become a story like, ‘my narcissistic inheritance’?

              (Hmmm … Oh well, you’ve done it to economics … Why not History?)

              Under such a regime other dead letters might include the pseudo-social-scientific findings of the likes of NZCPR and the NZ Institute … ?

              But Lo and Hark, there are written records of numerous and multiple cases of Pakeha deceit, duplicity, iniquity and Treaty violation …

              ‘WE’ have collectively ratified them in the process of Treaty settlement negotiations.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  January 10, 2017

              Lucky old us. We pay for the research to discover we should pay some more and pay more people to decide for us that we approve its validity and objectivity. Everyone gets paid except us. And now there are ever so many written records that document “numerous and multiple cases of Pakeha deceit, duplicity, iniquity and Treaty violation”.

              It’s a lot like the overwhelming evidence we are causing climate change. The evidence follows the money rather than vice versa.

      • PZ substitute Maori for Pakeha in your assertion and you would be closer to the truth.

        Reply
  4. Brown

     /  January 9, 2017

    I think it serves the PM right that the role is subverted by a rabble because politicians have, for years, treated Maori as special and separate, to be treated as govt partners in decisions and so on. English has, at last, has said they can get stuffed at this level and brought some nobility back to the role of PM. I hope he means it.

    Reply
    • Gezza

       /  January 9, 2017

      I do not always suffer fools gladly Brown but let me just say how pleased I am to see you.

      Reply
      • Brown

         /  January 10, 2017

        Being a fool I guess you will need to translate this so I can make sense of it.

        Reply
        • Gezza

           /  January 10, 2017

          Certainly. It means that while I have sometimes been at loggerheads with you about religious matters, I do sometimes share some of your views, and would be interested to learn more about what you believe and why. But you generally do not engage.
          In this particular case I feel your view is lacking in sagacity, and employed ironical humour to convey that.

          I appreciate that you have responded in kind.

          Reply
          • Conspiratoor

             /  January 10, 2017

            Curious to know G how you perceive browns view to be lacking in sagacity. Au contraire he is on the money. In fact he stands out as one of the most level headed and sagacious commenters here. He also pays tax. Cheers,c

            Reply
            • Gezza

               /  January 10, 2017

              He is a good man, a helper of the underdog in certain situations, but sometimes he is off the mark. Mr English is not nobility, he is a nob. It is possible there was an autocorrect error.

            • Conspiratoor

               /  January 10, 2017

              G, with the greatest respect I fear you may have misconstrued Brown’s intent, an unfortunate affliction shared with a number of your fellow commenters. You see Brown was referring to Bill not in the sense of belonging to the nobility, the aristocracy as it were. But in the quality of his character. In other words he has assigned to Bill the qualities of virtue, honour, honesty, decency, integrity and generosity. Now I happen to take issue with Brown on a number of these attributes but please do not fall into the trap of garbling the message in order to prove a point . Leave that to others. Cheers,c

            • Beneficiaries, including Superannuitants, are the purest types of taxpayer in Aotearoa New Zealand. They pay tax on their income – many in addition to the tax they have already paid to obtain that income – but cannot claim any expenses or concessions against it.

              Also, many can earn little or no additional income without incurring penalties …

            • Conspiratoor

               /  January 10, 2017

              True but a little messy parti. Allow me to tidy it up for you….

              Beneficiaries, (excluding bludgers, drug dealers, hookers and windscreen washers) including Superannuitants, are the purest types of taxpayer in Aotearoa New Zealand. They pay tax on their income – many in addition to the tax they have already paid to obtain that income – but cannot claim any expenses or concessions against it.

            • You are a bit like Alan CONspiratoor. In your own mind, denigration somehow equates with clarification ….

            • Gezza

               /  January 10, 2017

              “English has, at last, has said they can get stuffed at this level and brought some nobility back to the role of PM. I hope he means it.”

              I do see your point, c, and I thank you for the sensitivity with which you made it. Diplomacy is sometimes sadly lacking here, and I confess I may not be entirely without sin in this respect.

              Possibly my meaning would have been clearer had said I Hon Bill English, imo, is being a knob, in the sense that several knobs are being now waved about over this issue, as always, his has now been raised above the rest. The office of Prime Minister of New Zealand of course should be treated with respect, even when the holder is pulling ponytails and talking about weeing in the shower in the media. That is a given, & these acts attracted notable approval of its sanctification of the office overseas.

              I am not aware of any current plans by Hon Mr English to duplicate these feats, but I do wonder why he needs to even go there with this. I saw no plans to exclude him, just to ask him to let the equivalent nobles of the Maori nations discuss their issues first.

              Hopefully you will now understand my distress at Mr Brown’s & Mr Eagleson’s ungracious or unwitting conflation of certain unruly elements behaviour with the nobility of the Iwi.

              In the matter of the now legendary unruly element I believe it is customary for the police to manage that situation where necessary & this not displeasing to me.

              Let Te Tii follow its desired protocol. The rest of the people who go to the celebrations have a good time with no probs. I think it is actually a good idea for Hon William to make the forego the pleasure of his company, until such time as accommodation is satisfactory can be resolved.

            • Gezza

               /  January 10, 2017

              (I had a bad feeling about that last paragraph. Please pretend it does not exist and read this one instead.)

              Let Te Tii follow its desired protocol. The rest of the people who go to the celebrations have a good time with no probs. I think it is actually a good idea for Hon William to make them forego the pleasure of his company, until such time as a satisfactory accommodation can be resolved in the future. It may not be wise to rush such matters,

          • Klik Bate

             /  January 10, 2017

            SPOOF ALERT!

            Reply
        • Conspiratoor

           /  January 10, 2017

          in much the same way parti as you are able to transmogrify a sweeping generalisation into fact

          Reply
          • Brown

             /  January 10, 2017

            Goodness gracious. I’m sorry to have caused such a fuss. My wife and I would like to thank all of you who attempted to make sense of my foolishness – someone is sharing her burden and for that she is grateful.

            Reply
            • Gezza

               /  January 11, 2017

              Garn. She’s a lucky woman Brown. She could have done a lot worse.

    • Allow me to reword Brown: It serves the PM right that his role is subverted … because politicians have, for years, treated Maori as inferior and degenerate … not to be treated as partners despite being promised the role in the Treaty …

      Now English spins “some nobility back to the role of PM” by not going to Waitangi and therefore treating Maori as separate … which I dare say they couldn’t give a stuff about …

      Go figure eh!?

      Reply
      • PDB

         /  January 10, 2017

        PZ: “not to be treated as partners despite being promised the role in the Treaty”

        The partners thing is a nonsense and a recent rewriting of history.

        Go figure eh!?

        Reply
        • PDB – Its been fairly conclusively established that in order for hapu iwi to understand the English concept of ‘sovereignty’, the te reo version of Te Tiriti o Waitangi – the only one anyone signed – would have had to use the word “mana” and required them to ‘cede’ their ‘mana’.

          It specified neither of these things. Firstly, there isn’t a word for ‘cede’ in te reo.

          Secondly, if ‘mana’ had been used they wouldn’t have signed … So our comprehension of the situation hinges on their understanding of the word “kawanatanga”, not ours … [see Sir Hugh Kawharu’s annotated notes below link]

          My research leads me to believe the Chiefs were won over by the Second Clause, in which the Queen promises first protection and “unqualified exercise of their chieftainship” … and second especially land sales pre-emption by the Queen … unscrupulous land dealings having become a real problem by 1840 …

          How Clause Three’s “the same rights and duties of citizenship as the people of England” can possibly include enforced alienation of their land is beyond me, and yet this is what Maori found it meant for them within a few short years after signing …

          http://www.treaty2u.govt.nz/the-treaty-up-close/treaty-of-waitangi/

          The translations from Maori to English are the same – Sir Hugh Kawharu’s – but this one has his annotated notes –

          https://waitangitribunal.govt.nz/treaty-of-waitangi/translation-of-te-reo-maori-text/

          Reply
  5. Geoffrey

     /  January 9, 2017

    Well said Brown

    Reply
    • Brown

       /  January 11, 2017

      Sorry mate, you look to have backed a loser at 7 – 14. However, be of good cheer for the times; they are a changing.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s